Pittsburgh and Population

Both deal with migration and population, constant points of discussion/contention in Pittsburgh. Briem does a nice job of coming across as less pessimistic than many of the people who have made a cottage industry of wringing their hands about the local head count. Sure, a lot of people are leaving. But a lot of people are arriving, too. Rather than having me paraphrase the whole thing, just read it.

In the meantime, I think the op-ed does a good job of touching on another important truth: The numbers presented in the article are largely regional ones. But they are hardly the only ones that matter:

Within the region, the movement of population is reshaping the region. The continuing movement of population away from urban cores is true for regions across the country. Suburbanization and exurbanization is a trend almost everywhere. Allegheny County has long been the concentration of population and employment in Southwestern Pennsylvania. That it bears the brunt of population loss as residents move ever farther out is almost unavoidable.

Yet even though more people leave Allegheny County each year than arrive, there are still thousands who move into the county from the suburbs each year. It is not a one-way flow.

The movement of population within the region has its consequences as well. New infrastructure is needed even as regional population is stagnant. Jobs are not moving out from the core at the same rate as residents showing that workers are willing to endure ever-longer commutes. Today, thousands travel into the region daily from Ohio, West Virginia and beyond.

I think this touches a few very raw nerves. Because a lot of people wouldn't be at all happy if the Pittsburgh region grew by leaps and bounds... but all the new people were in Cranberry. We see this with the current discussion about housing "downtown." My mind goes back to this article in the early days of the mayor's abatement proposal:

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl would love to be the guy who reverses the city's six-decade population plunge. His formula for doing that includes affordable living and merrymaking Downtown, more fun development like the SouthSide Works, and engagement between the city and its school district.

I think that when a lot of people talk about the "population plunge," they are in fact talking about the city. And assigning that reality to the entire region. As Briem has shown time and again, you have to be careful about what you are talking about. And even more careful not to cherry pick the numbers that suit your argument on any given day. It's easy to let it get away from you.

At any rate, I do think that the intramural scuffle is at least as interesting as the regional one. I know I have pointed this out a thousand times, but I do think it is important to think about where the new city residents will come from in the mayor's abatement proposal and other "downtown" initiatives. Because for a lot of people, getting a few thousand people to move from Cranberry to the Golden Triangle would be a great achievement. Others might see it as pointless. Others. like me, wonder what will happen if a whole bunch of the new downtown types come from other city neighborhoods. Which puts me in mind of another discussion of Ravenstahl's abatement plan:

The measure, approved 8-0, will waive the first $2,700 in city property taxes for 10 years on new housing units built Downtown and in 28 other city neighborhoods.

"It's symbolic of our effort to prioritize and give incentives for people to move back Downtown and to create incentives for people to move back into neighborhoods that haven't seen investment for some time," Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said.

Move downtown and into the neighborhoods... from Cleveland? From Westmoreland County? From Shadyside? What's interesting is that these things could have a hugely transformative impact on the city and on the region as a whole. But they could, conceivably, have very little impact on the region's total headcount. Or they might have a large impact.

Either way, I bet there will be a way to look at the numbers that will allow the optimists to remain optimistic, and for the pessimists to remain pessimistic. Of course, that's a pretty safe wager.

Comments

A lot of attention is focused on the material aspects of living (taxes, the properties etc) as a means of attracting residents, and perhaps there's good reason for that, but failure to address the political and social environment in the city is going to keep the trends just as they are for sometime.

City of Pittsburgh residents like to portray themselves as friendly, caring, helpful people, but as one of many people I know who had their home, auto and other property vandalized in 2004 by Kerry/Edwards campaign workers and members of the local Democrat brown shirt squads only to have our calls to police ignored, I'll personally attest to just how hostile and unfriendly an environment the city is if your not willing to surrender your rights and embrace the leftist orthodoxy that has gripped the city for several decades. Is a $2,700 is tax break worth the cost of having to send your kid to the Pittsburgh Public Indoctrination Camp and have your family's values and religious beliefs trashed on a daily basis or be the target of violence for daring to be one of the shrinking numbers of non-Democrats still left in the city? I don't think so.

The saying; you can't shine a turd applies to the city and its current situation. Build, build, build and abate all you want but at the end of the day the re-election of a slack jawed, mouth-breather with no accomplishments what so ever of his own like Luke Ravensthal over someone as eminently qualified as Mark Desantis, the continued election of people as caustic, hateful, anti-American, anti-christian and anti-conservative like Doug Shields and Dan Frankel sends a clear message that people who are unwilling to grovel at James Burn's feet, lick his boots and keep paying tribute to the Costa's and their ilk have no place in the City of Pittsburgh.

If Chris Briem wants write about something meaningful and useful he should consider examining his own role as part of the group that helped further undermine the democratic process in Allegheny County, stifle minority party representation and perpetuate the one party soviet style government that exists here when they gerrymandered several county council districts to favor Democrats and undo the years of work done by home rule proponents.

Chris and his ilk can keep tap dancing around it all they want but the fact remains that the stench emanating from the turd that is 60 years of one party Democrat control of city government and their iron fisted treatment their opponents will drive out more people and deter relocation of others to a far greater degree than they're willing to admit.

I know for a fact that I'm not alone in holding the belief that I would gladly pay ten times the amount I currently do in taxes if it meant I never had to live another day of my life in that ugly, vile, soul-less socialist enclave known as the city of Pittsburgh.

Please give an example of anti-American, anti-Christian behavior by Doug Shields and Dan Frankel. There are plenty of grounds to criticize both of them, don't get me wrong, but your statements strike me as pretty outlandish.

I would agree that the political climate in this city is suffocating, and hobbles any chance at economic rejuvenation, but you greatly exaggerate its impact on migration in and out of the city.

Pick up and read any of the tax-payer funded hate-filled screeds they send out to their constituents. They read like they were written buy one of George Soros' lackey's.

In Shield's case one need only encounter him in person, or at a public meeting and listen to him run off at the mouth about anyone who disagrees with him, how much he hates George Bush, hates Republicans, hates conservatives, if there's a more hateful, caustic person in city politics I'd be afraid to meet him.

Of course the radicals and "progressives" that he answers to in his district don't see him that way, they love him when he's playing to the worst elements in their character.

When it comes to sowing division in a community these two are the best.

Pick up and read any of the tax-payer funded hate-filled screeds they send out to their constituents. They read like they were written buy one of George Soros' lackey's.

In Shield's case one need only encounter him in person, or at a public meeting and listen to him run off at the mouth about anyone who disagrees with him, how much he hates George Bush, hates Republicans, hates conservatives, if there's a more hateful, caustic person in city politics I'd be afraid to meet him.

Of course the radicals and "progressives" that he answers to in his district don't see him that way, they love him when he's playing to the worst elements in their character.

When it comes to sowing division in a community these two are the best.

No, describing everyone who disagrees with you as evil, tell anyone who will listen how much you hate them, dismissing any critic of yours by calling them a member of the religious right and ignoring any constituents, their needs and concerns who aren't registered Democrats simply because you can get away with it and still expect to get re-elected does.

And really, I don't expect that any of the other council member are any better from what I've heard, but I can't speak to them since it was only Doug Shields I had the misfortune of being "represented" by and had to listen to.